Advertisement

Reviewer Guidelines

OVERVIEW | THE PURPOSE OF PEER REVIEW | ONLINE SUBMISSION AND PEER REVIEW SYSTEM | INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS | GUIDELINES FOR SUBMITTING A QUALITY REVIEW | ETHICAL ISSUES | REVIEWER COMMENTS | ADDITIONAL HELP TOOLS


OVERVIEW

The peer review process is an integral and fundamental part of scientific publication. Reviewers are often experienced authors in their own right who generously offer their time to validate scientific research. They are generally active in their field and are likely to uncover cases of ethical misconduct due to their level of activity. Reviewers’ identity is never disclosed to Authors and is known only to the Editor in charge of the manuscript.

Back to top


THE PURPOSE OF PEER REVIEW

Submitted manuscripts are normally sent out to a minimum of two reviewers and often more. Reviewers’ detailed comments and recommendations will enable the Editors to make a decision on the submission, whether it should be accepted, revised with minor or major changes or rejected.

Reviewers’ comments are invaluable to author(s) as their suggestions will help improve their submission. Reviewers will highlight serious flaws in submissions that will impede publication, or whether there are additional trials or data available which support author conclusions. Should a manuscript be rejected, the comments supplied will enable the authors to improve their research.

Back to top


ONLINE SUBMISSION AND PEER REVIEW SYSTEM

Wichtig has adopted Editorial Manager®, an online manuscript submission and peer review system for scholarly publishers and societies. It is one of the most reliable and widely used with more than 5000 journals deployed worldwide. Additional supporting documents and help tools will guide you throughout the entire revision process.

Back to top

INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Conduct your review objectively and provide constructive feedback, where possible provide references to support comments. Direct personal criticism is not appropriate.

When requested to review a submission you should consider three points before accepting:


1) Is the topic within your area of expertise? You should review only if you are competent in the topic presented.

2) Are you able to commit to the timeframe set out?

3) Is there a conflict of interest between your work and that of the authors? We ask you to declare competing interests, this may not necessarily exclude you entirely from reviewing, but it is imperative that you disclose this to the Editor.

Back to top

GUIDELINES FOR SUBMITTING A QUALITY REVIEW

Confidentiality

Any manuscript sent for peer review is a confidential document and remains so until it is published. As reviewers’ identity is never disclosed to the Authors, make sure your comments are anonymous and you may not be identified from your observations.

Reviewers should address the points below:

  • Does the manuscript title describe the article appropriately?
  • Is the study sample size adequate?
  • Does the article support or contradict previous theories? If so provide references.
  • Prospective is better than retrospective. Larger sample sizes are better than smaller. Longer follow-up is better than shorter.
  • Does the manuscript explain clearly the inclusion and exclusion criteria?
  • Authors should declare that they have received ethics approval and/or patient consent for the study, where appropriate.
  • Are there other ethical or regulatory issues? Conflict of interest issues?
  • If the organisation of the manuscript is illogical please suggest improvements.
  • Is data displayed appropriately? If data is given in table format, it need not be reiterated in the text or vice versa.
  • If you are aware of any issues that you think have not been adequately addressed, please inform the Editor.
  • References should include pertinent material and need not be encyclopaedic. Did the authors select the appropriate material to cite?
Back to top


ETHICAL ISSUES

Plagiarism: if you suspect that an article is a substantial copy of another work, please let the Editor know, citing the previous work in as much detail as possible.

Fraud: it can be very difficult to detect fraud, but if you suspect the results of any works to be untrue, please discuss your concerns directly with the Editor.

Other ethical concerns: for medical research, has confidentiality been maintained? Has there been a violation in the ethical treatment of animal or human subjects? If so, then highlight these to the Editor.

The Journal and the Publisher are in agreement that any advertising or commercial revenue will in no way influence Editorial decisions. 

Additional information for reviewers

Council of Science Editors paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3331

Back to top


REVIEWER COMMENTS

Once you have completed your evaluation of the manuscript, you should write your report to the Editor. If this is going to be delayed, let the Editor know so you can arrange a deadline extension.

Your comments will help authors improve their skills and expertise; even if you reject a submission you should be constructive as it will help authors improve future submissions.

Each journal has different evaluation parameters, but in general online review forms include the following key elements:

Recommendation - your suggestion on whether the manuscript should be accepted, or not.

Confidential comments to the Editor - your confidential comments to the Editor will not be shared with Authors.

Comments to authors - your constructive comments to the authors will be shared with the authors via an anonymous form.

Back to top

ADDITIONAL HELP TOOLS

Database search

Editorial Manager offers a sophisticated help tool to search through existing literature.

  • Similar Articles in MEDLINE
  • Google Scholar Title Search
  • Search Google for Author
  • Search Google for Title
  • Google Scholar Author Search

Similar Articles in MEDLINE is potentially the most useful tool as it allows you to search through the Medline database and evaluate similar literature.


Send email

At any time you may send an email to the Editor or Editorial Office directly from the submission you are reviewing. This is through the link Send Email within the submission Action links.

Back to top